Reflections on Philosophy andZen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

Graham Priest

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance was published in 1974. As demonstrated by its
sales, and the fact that it achieved something of a cult following, the book
was a highly successful one. It was also a philosophical book. Interspersed
with the details of the road trip it describes were philosophical reflections which painted a picture of the world and ways of
being in it. To what extent this was a Zen picture, one might argue about; but
that it was a philosophical picture which was presented is not in doubt.

Despite these facts, the book and its ideas were never taken up by professional
philosophers. Why? To a certain extent, this was because it was drawing
on a tradition that Western philosophers have usually regarded as not
philosophy at all. The entrenched attitude has been
that the Asian philosophical traditions, such as Zen Buddhism, are not
philosophy, but religion, mysticism, oracular pronouncements. The attitude, it
must be said, can be held only from a position of ignorance; and it is
changing, if slowly. However, in the 1970s and ’80s, Asian philosophical
traditions had no presence in Western philosophy departments.This, however, is only a small part of the
explanation. There is a much more important part of the picture.

For my sins, I am a
professional philosopher—meaning that I earn my living my teaching and
researching in philosophy. Several times a year I receive letters, articles,
and even books, from amateur philosophers—by which I mean no more that
they are people who do not earn their living in this way.The letters, etc., contain philosophical
thoughts, ideas, views of the world. Some of the
authors are just curious about my views on the ideas expressed; but many seek
my help in getting the ideas published, or at least circulated and acknowledged
by professional philosophers.

Sometimes, the works verge
on the crankish. But generally speaking, they are produced by
thoughtful people, advocating potentially interesting ideas, aimed at important
issues.And maybe with
sufficient work, the thoughts could be made to fly.But as pieces of philosophy, these works
all appear amateur, in the same way that a college baseballer will appear
amateur to a professional: it is just not up to the standard required in the
major leagues.

Contemporary professional
philosophy is a highly sophisticated enterprise.Ideas are not only put forward. They are
analyzed; their strengths investigated; their weaknesses probed and
counter-probed; their connections with other areas of philosophy and the
history of philosophy are explored.The communications I am sent rarely get beyond putting forward an
interesting idea.

The contemporary
philosophical profession is sometimes criticized for losing the wood for the
trees—becoming obsessed with the analysis of minutiae—or even for
forgetting the wood entirely.I
think that there is a certain truth in this criticism.But it remains the case that good
philosophy has always done more than put forward ideas. Analysis and criticism
have forever been central to it. One has to have only a passing acquaintance
with the work of Plato, Aquinas, Hume, Kant, Heidegger, Wittgenstein,
to come to appreciate this fact.

One might then think it an
act of hubris for amateur philosophers to want to play in the professional
leagues.After all, for an amateur
to suppose that they could make an important contribution to modern physics,
economics, or psychology would certainly appear such (though I do receive
manuscripts that try to do this too sometimes!). I don’t think this is true in
most cases, though. Philosophy is different from these other subjects. Most
philosophical problems and ideas are ones that any thoughtful person can
understand; many are important to people’s lives;
and—unsurprisingly—people discuss them with friends when the
conversation turns from the mundane to more serious topics. (I once heard Tom
Stoppard say that the difference between a philosopher and a plumber is that
when philosophers go to the pub, they discuss philosophy; whereas when plumbers
go to the pub, they discuss . . . philosophy.)I think that this fact may make someone
who has never had a professional training in philosophy think that they can
contribute to contemporary philosophy in a way that they would never dream of
thinking that they could contribute to physics or these other disciplines.

Anyway, the gulf between
professional and amateur philosophers is every bit as wide as that between
professional and amateur physicists. And that is why it will always be hard for
the profession to engage seriously with amateur ideas.This is not to say that the ideas have
no value. But it is to say that if they are to be made to shape up, this can be
done only with the hard, critical work, which is necessary for taking them
seriously.The technique for doing
this is one of the things that a professional training in philosophy aspires to
give people. And though I would not go so far as to say that it is impossible
without this, it is certainly exceptionally difficult.

Now, and to return to Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance:
its philosophical content just did not meet the standards of rigorous thought
that contemporary professional philosophy requires.Thus, for example, one of the most
central philosophical chapters is Chapter 20, where the metaphysics of Quality
is laid out. Quality, it transpires, is an indefinable something which we
experience and then conceptualise to produce our Lebenswelt.Any
Western-trained philosopher at this point would think immediately of Kant, and
would locate the view being discussed with respect to his thought. Neither is
this simply an act of scholarship. Western philosophers have had over 200 years
to think through the problems associated with Kant’s view; and a natural
question is whether the view at hand is subject to some of the same problems,
or can avoid or provide novel answers to them. Later in the chapter, it turns
out that Quality is like the Dao of the Dao
De Jing.Fair enough. But
Chinese philosophers have had over 2000 years to ponder and comment on the
notion, its problems and ramifications. No Eastern-trained philosopher dealing
with the matter would ignore these sophisticated discussions.

Of course, it will be said
that considerations such as these are out of place in a novel.And that is exactly right. But ideas
expressed in fiction can only ever be the start of a conversation. It should be
remembered that perhaps the greatest philosophical literary figure, Sartre, did
not just write novels and plays. He wrote Being
and Nothingness to provide the tough theoretical underpinnings of the ideas
expressed in the literary works.

None of this is meant to
denigrate Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance as a work of fiction; nor is it to say that the philosophical
ideas in the book are uninteresting or unimportant; nor is it even to say that
fiction is an inappropriate philosophical vehicle. It is simply to explain why
the book was not taken up by the philosophical profession.